Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-26-2021, 04:47 PM - 2 Likes   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2020
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 513
SOOC: a detrimental choice or beneficial?

Trying to avoid any duplication, I'm fairly sure this hasn't been posted before.

I'm certainly a beginner when it comes to photography, and wanting to keep the hobby as a way to keep me away from the glare of the computer (work and life in general means I spend more hours than I care staring at one) I decided to try and learn my camera, technique and craft sans post processing.

I wondered if there are any of the more seasoned members who could perhaps share their thoughts on this being a help or hindrance? I'd like to think I've improved as a photographer, with the main are being my composition of shots. I doubt this would have come about had I spent so much of my time trying to edit the images I capture to become something beyond what I saw.

Hopefully this will spark a nice discussion and I can learn to see a virtue in an area of photography I currently feel a numbness to.

Incidentally, writing this post allowed me to find the SOOC club The SOOC Club - PentaxForums.com which I aim to go post in !

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-S1  Photo 

Last edited by CedrusMacro; 02-27-2021 at 03:22 AM.
02-26-2021, 05:46 PM - 12 Likes   #2
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,113
To a crude, first approximation, the difference between shooting SOOC versus RAW is like the difference between shooting slide film versus print film.

With both SOOC and slide film, the image is what the image is after clicking the shutter. All the work goes into picking the settings (or the film) before clicking shutter. What comes out is the final product.*

With both RAW and print film, the photographer's work is only half done after they click the shutter. There's the second half of the process of using all the tools of a digital or physical darkroom for converting the captured image into a final product through a host of adjustments to exposure, contrast, color, highlights, shadows, and retouched features.**

Some say SOOC/slides are a mark of laziness -- real photographers post process. Others say SOOC/slides is a mark of confidence -- real photographers don't need to post process.

Some say RAW/print is the way to get the most out of an image. Others say RAW/print is a miserable chore that takes time away from being outside taking pictures.

All those views are right and it's up to each photographer to pick a strategy that works for them.

Finally, in this digital age, it's easy to pick the RAW+JPG setting of the camera, store both, use the SOOC JPG if you like, and only post-process the RAW if you really feel like it.


*OK, you can post-process SOOC and slides but if you're going to do that it might be better to start with RAW or print film for the increased dynamic range.

*OK, you don't have to post-process RAW or print-film images, automagical settings of the RAW developer or darkroom printer can be used.
02-26-2021, 06:19 PM - 1 Like   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Oklahoma USA
Posts: 2,192
Similar current discussion:

The Unreasonable Fear of Doing Nothing - PentaxForums.com
02-26-2021, 06:44 PM - 1 Like   #4
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Flagstaff, Arizona
Posts: 1,626
Photoptimist's summary is right on point.

It depends on why you take pictures and what for.

I take photos mostly to document my life - what I am doing, what my wife is doing, what my dog is doing, how much snow did we just get, and what do I want to sell on Ebay. I am not generally trying to be a commercial photographer who will be selling my shots.

So, I almost always just shoot jpeg and save the SOOC images Saves space on my computer, and is good enough. If I know I will want to do better, I do the RAW+jpeg option.

02-26-2021, 07:32 PM - 2 Likes   #5
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
The last time I shot an image in raw+ jpeg, the Raw image took 40 minutes to get "just as good". And for the SOOC images, the camera did things my software can't do. My guess is you have to be pretty good to match the SOOC images.

Last edited by normhead; 02-27-2021 at 06:07 AM.
02-26-2021, 08:44 PM - 1 Like   #6
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chennai, India
Photos: Albums
Posts: 534
The title seem to use pariah as derogatory/negative sense. Better to be avoided.
Just FYI. This is considered politically incorrect in my region. It’s like using n-word in USA.
02-26-2021, 08:56 PM   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Kiddo70's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,399
I have a long history with film before ever turning to digital. As a result, I tend to favor minimal processing of my digital images. With film, it was “pull” or “push” the development. Now with digital, I may increase color richness or warmth, or increase contrast or lighten shadows, but I try to keep it to a minimum. To me, this is being faithful to the original subject without producing an imaginary image that doesn’t match any reality.

02-27-2021, 12:11 AM   #8
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,177
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The last time I shot an image in raw+ jpeg, the SOOC image took 40 minutes to get "just as good". And for the SOOC images, the camera did things my software can't do. My guess is you have to be pretty good to match the SOOC images.
Camera manufacturer has been working on it for much more than 40 minutes with image file processing experts that do it full time professionally. Plus, post-processing software on PC/Mac can't compete with the processing speed of real time camera hardware. But, if you messed up with exposure or white balance when shooting, or want a different choice of color style, this is when having the DNG allows to rescue the image.
02-27-2021, 01:13 AM - 1 Like   #9
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,704
photoptimist sums it up well.


I do have a few opinions of my own.

You are probably better off with some cheaper 2010 camera.
The limited dynamic range, smaller viewing size, likely deeper apparent contrast due to limited DR (hence also deeper colors), all make it easier for SOOC than current cameras.
Don't forget that advanced cameras (especially Pentax) aims to bring the image to the most neutral.
A 'neutral' white 'balance' and exposure.
Sharpness settings which don't fully utilize what is possible with better computation power on a PC.
Blacks and whites are aimed towards the center with the intention to be stretched later by the photographer in post.

The result of all this 'neutralization' are non deep blacks, lower contrast, less deep colors, less sharpness and blanket noise reduction.


Perhaps, all the above mention 'issues' are already solved by a sort of modern camera.
Not the MILC or DSLR that we play around with as hobbyists, but the phone camera with its AI presets and computational power that makes it more seamless to makes things look good SOOC.
02-27-2021, 02:30 AM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2020
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 513
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by tibbitts Quote
Ahh, apologies for missing this and starting a new thread, cheers for linking.
02-27-2021, 02:51 AM - 2 Likes   #11
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2016
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,027
I have probably been taking photos for about 60 years, most of that time using SLR or DSLR cameras, mostly Pentax.

I quite like Photoptimist's characterisation of SOOC as similar to using slide film, as that was my main interest in film days. I now shoot RAW+, but try to get the shot right when I press the shutter and have the camera set up to get the jpeg result I seek. I normally don't spend more than a minute or two in post processing and I usually only make a limited range of adjustments - I still aim to under-expose a little, as in slide days, so not infrequently just lift shadows a bit, for example. I'm not averse to spending more time on an image where adjusting the jpeg doesn't produce a good enough result or what I was seeking, but it isn't what I set out to do. For me, the RAW file and additional processing is a "back stop" in getting the photo I (think I) saw when I pressed the shutter.

Interestingly, a few days ago I looked at and processed a few scans I'd done of slides taken in 1974. The adjustments made were to add a watermark, sharpen a little, and lift the shadows or adjust contrast. A couple of minutes at most on each slide, usually in GIMP alone, and that is probably typical both of processing old slides which have scanned reasonably well, or processing more recent digital images. Some old slides have colour casts or other faults requiring more attention as do some digital images - years ago, I was very good at "cockeyed horizons".

We all see the world slightly differently because of eyesight differences, age, or simply preference. I see many superb images that I cannot personally like because they appear to me to be over-sharp, over-contrasty, and generally over-processed. My photography generally tries to replicate something I've seen, not create an idealised version of it.

I can appreciate people's skill in post-processing, but I never was or wanted to be a darkroom wizard, and nor do I want to spend hours processing digital images. For me, the photographic skill and creativity is in composition, and knowing your camera and how to use it to get the shot you want. For me, trying to get the result I want SOOC, is a positive choice and an aim.
02-27-2021, 03:00 AM - 1 Like   #12
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Worcestershire, UK
Photos: Albums
Posts: 527
I now always use jpg + raw as memory is quite cheap nowadays, so I can fit loads on my sd card, keep plenty on my pc, and back up to disk when getting a bit full. I can always prune out unwanted raw files or jpgs as needed. This also allows me to use the RAW button for another function (in my case turning wifi on or off).
Mostly jpgs out of the camera are just fine for what I want, but RAWs have the edge for challenging lighting or if I just want to play.
02-27-2021, 03:01 AM - 1 Like   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2020
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 513
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
To a crude, first approximation, the difference between shooting SOOC versus RAW is like the difference between shooting slide film versus print film.

With both SOOC and slide film, the image is what the image is after clicking the shutter. All the work goes into picking the settings (or the film) before clicking shutter. What comes out is the final product.*

With both RAW and print film, the photographer's work is only half done after they click the shutter. There's the second half of the process of using all the tools of a digital or physical darkroom for converting the captured image into a final product through a host of adjustments to exposure, contrast, color, highlights, shadows, and retouched features.**

Some say SOOC/slides are a mark of laziness -- real photographers post process. Others say SOOC/slides is a mark of confidence -- real photographers don't need to post process.

Some say RAW/print is the way to get the most out of an image. Others say RAW/print is a miserable chore that takes time away from being outside taking pictures.

All those views are right and it's up to each photographer to pick a strategy that works for them.

Finally, in this digital age, it's easy to pick the RAW+JPG setting of the camera, store both, use the SOOC JPG if you like, and only post-process the RAW if you really feel like it.


*OK, you can post-process SOOC and slides but if you're going to do that it might be better to start with RAW or print film for the increased dynamic range.

*OK, you don't have to post-process RAW or print-film images, automagical settings of the RAW developer or darkroom printer can be used.
Great points Photoptimist, your analogy runs parallel to thoughts I often have. I've photos I wonder if, once learning what the parameters do, could be enhanced of I post processed.

Considering film, it's absolutely spot on about the darkroom being the same as digital post, and I had admittedly forgotten to consider this.

However, would you say the difference in options to manipulate and adjust the modern digital photo is vastly increased over the film era, which moves further away from the images we originally see and try to capture?

---------- Post added 02-27-21 at 03:04 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The last time I shot an image in raw+ jpeg, the SOOC image took 40 minutes to get "just as good". And for the SOOC images, the camera did things my software can't do. My guess is you have to be pretty good to match the SOOC images.
This has been my thoughts so far normhead, it's a matter of time to get any meaningful improvements over the edits the camera makes as it captures.

---------- Post added 02-27-21 at 03:06 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The last time I shot an image in raw+ jpeg, the SOOC image took 40 minutes to get "just as good". And for the SOOC images, the camera did things my software can't do. My guess is you have to be pretty good to match the SOOC images.
This has been my thoughts so far normhead, it's a matter of time to get any meaningful improvements over the edits the camera makes as it captures.

---------- Post added 02-27-21 at 03:13 AM ----------

Apologies all, trying to reply from my phone and it's double quoted my reply to normhead 😅.

---------- Post added 02-27-21 at 03:15 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by siva.ss.kumar Quote
The title seem to use pariah as derogatory/negative sense. Better to be avoided.
Just FYI. This is considered politically incorrect in my region. It’s like using n-word in USA.
Thanks for that information, I'm not religious and from the UK, so I apologise, I didn't mean any offense, if I can edit the title I'll sort it, I'd not I'll ask a mod.
02-27-2021, 04:30 AM - 6 Likes   #14
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,603
I think the whole point is to come away with images that you like. As time goes by, I find that you can get increasingly good images from a camera's jpeg engine. This will probably be adequate for many situations and certainly for snapshots it is what most people probably use.

I would make a few comments further.

1. The goal should always be to get the image as "right" in camera as possible. Regardless of whether you shoot RAW or jpeg, your images are going to be better and process easier if they are really close (hopefully perfect) at time of shooting.

2. I tend to compulsive about post processing. So I am making tiny bumps to shadows, little crops, straightening photos little bits regardless of whether I shoot jpeg or RAW. With RAW these sorts of adjustments are easier. Certainly the time taken to do these sorts of things is the same. I am also compulsive with regard to deleting images. I have found that this actually takes more time (sorting out which of these five images is the best one) is the longest process -- much longer than post processing the images.

3. Efficiency is key. I am convinced that those who are most bothered by post processing are not efficient. They haven't learned hot keys and syncing that can really speed up the process. I am not saying this in a disparaging way. I just mean that whether you use Raw Therapee or Lightroom or some other piece of software, figuring out how to do things quickly using keyboard short cuts can save a bunch of time. It is worth the effort to learn your preferred software.

4. Photos worth keeping are worth working on -- at least a little bit. People have the impression that Ansel Adams packed his gear via mule into Yosemite and set up and captured beautiful images of Half Dome and then said "Print 'em Danno!" and went off to capture more great images. The reality was that he kept copious notes while he was capturing images and then worked really hard both on the Negatives and the Prints -- hence two of his famous teaching books -- "The Negative" and "The Print." I shoot a lot of landscape photography and I have found that in order to get the most out of my images with regard to dynamic range, I do best working on them on my desktop.

I would further comment that certain types of images, particularly thinking of Pixel Shift, can give results approaching medium format quality, but require more effort -- think tripod and more post processing. To me, it is worth it, but as always, this is up to the photographer.

5. The most important thing isn't even the image. I am being a little silly here, but I really do think that the journey, the experience, and the joy of photography are the most important things. If post processing sucks that joy out of you then you need to figure out either how to do it more efficiently or skip it entirely. Most of us aren't making great art, but we are capturing interesting scenes and making memories. I think that many people drop out of photography because they find out they aren't the next Ansel Adams and they aren't really enjoying what they are doing.

When I wake up before my wife and kids and go out and take photos of a little barn as the sun is coming up and I hear the birds beginning to sing and smell the cows in the next field over, I am getting more than images. Even if I get home and find that the photos didn't turn out for some reason, I don't regret spending those peaceful moments out doors.

Last edited by Rondec; 02-27-2021 at 05:37 AM.
02-27-2021, 05:06 AM   #15
Seeker of Knowledge
Loyal Site Supporter
aslyfox's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Topeka, Kansas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,563
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I think the whole point is to come away with images that you like. . . .
add to that gem of wisdom

to have fun with your photography

( unless you are one who is making a successful business from photography )

any way

what is SOOC

you have preselected your options via your camera settings have you not ?

as opposed to modifying the photo post production ( whether the camera saved the image as RAW or Jpeg )

please remember that I don't claim photography expertise, I'm just someone who posts a lot
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, club, darkroom, dslr, film, image, images, normhead, photography, post, post-process, print, process, shutter, sooc, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thematic The SOOC Club BruceBanner Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 209 09-05-2022 06:11 PM
KP B&W SOOC (settings for optimal results) recklessdiffraction Pentax KP 9 12-27-2020 09:44 PM
Modern Vintage Straight Out Of the Camera (SOOC) ggascay Monthly Photo Contests 5 12-31-2019 08:14 AM
SOOC Shots from a European Adventure deadwolfbones Ricoh GR 8 10-27-2014 06:06 PM
Obama or Romney...Who Would Be The Most Beneficial to America, & The World? pickles General Talk 78 09-06-2012 05:53 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:23 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top